By John C. Dyer, UK correspondent
July 11, 2011 Update: Murdoch's Worldwide Media Holdings as of December 2010 according to the Columbia Journalism Review.
Shock waves reverberated through the UK the evening of 7 July, 2011. News International’s James Murdoch announced that the coming Sunday edition of News of the World would be the 168 year old newspaper’s last. The staff had been assembled late in the afternoon and summarily notified of their redundancy. The next day, Scotland Yard arrested Andy Coulson, the Prime Minister's former spin doctor. The Prime Minister spent the morning trying to explain away questions concerning his judgment as well as what he knew and when he learned it.
Like the ancient morality tale of Atlantis, the News of The World collapsed into the thundering waves of the so-called “phone hacking scandal” and the aftermath Tsunami of speculation as to the next move of the Dark Lord (Rupert Murdoch) its owner. Sure enough, in less than an hour BBC had confirmed that The Sun, also owned by News International, would introduce a Sunday edition. Sources at News International promoted the idea that its bid to take over 100% ownership of BSkyB news should no longer be seen as a potential threat that News International would have too much control over the news content seen by the British public
But also on the 8th, the government made it clear that the volume of comments Culture Minister Jeremy Hunt must consider before ruling on News International’s acquisition application is so great it will be fall before a decision is forthcoming. Channel 4 took up the speculation and along with it the political ramifications for Prime Minister David Cameron - uncomfortably close to all things Murdoch.
It might be tempting to view this as just yet another British scandal. But it is also a potential US scandal whose theatre is the UK. The US public and government need to pay serious attention to the details and their possible wide-reaching implications.
"Thunderball" not Shakespeare’s "MacBeth" or "King Lear"
The unfolding story may seem a Shakespearean tragedy, but as I view its relentlessly increasing tempo - first unfolding sporadically and then in the last few weeks in an hourly torrent of “OMG, can you believe this one,” - the story reminds me more of “Thunderball.”
Not that I am saying Rupert Murdoch is Ernst Stavro Blofeld, James Murdoch Number 2 or Rebekah Wade Brooks Pussy Galore. That would be unfair. These, after all were fictional characters.
I will, nevertheless, leave the whole sordid history of this story’s development to the news media and Scotland Yard. It’s difficult to miss. I will, rather, focus in on its significance.
The News of the World was arguably the most widely read newspaper in the UK with a circulation of 2.7 million at last report. As one of its editors bragged, its occasional fall-off in readership was often larger than its rivals’ total readership. It could have lost half its regular readers and still have reached more of the British public than any other periodical in the UK - feeding delighted readers with gossip concerning the scandals of the day for as long as any reader can remember, for longer than Rupert Murdoch’s ownership. Murddoch took over the paper in 1969 as I was graduating from college.
What then triggered its collapse?
The trigger is often labeled the “phone hacking scandal.” This label originated in the initial reports that brought it to public attention. Those reports related wholly to a journalist’s use of a private investigator to hack into the phones of a handful of celebrities and public figures (including Princes William and Harry). In the first few years The Guardian newspaper kept the story alive despite constant heckling from News International and the Conservative Party and Scotland Yard’s initial confirmation that the practice was confined to a single rogue reporter after an investigation in which “no stone was left unturned.”
It may be true that political motivations helped keep the story alive. At the centre of the scandal was Andy Coulson, the PR genius who had helped bring the Conservatives to power. Prime Minister Cameron is also famously close to another central figure, News International’s CEO, Rebekah Wade Brooks. Several months after Scotland Yard reopened the investigation in January 2011, the scandal mushroomed amid mounting evidence that it was broader than a handful of celebrities and public figures.
Brooks, for one, had admitted in testimony before a Parliamentary Committee that News International had paid police for information, a crime. Andy Coulson’s attempt to walk her out of her goof only fueled the fire. By the time of James Murdoch’s (Rupert Murdoch’s son and chairman of News International) announcement the afternoon of 7 July, the proportions of the scandal had become breathtaking.
A summary based on news reports from BCC and Channel 4: (Note: the allegations are from the files of the private investigator first caught up in the scandal):
1) News of the World employed more than one investigator. Scotland Yard estimates it paid over £100,000 pounds (nearly $160,000 US) to this investigator whose files are in Scotland Yard’s possession.
2) Those files consist of over 11,000 pages of personal identification, contact, and association details for approximately 4,000 individuals. It is yet unclear as to how many of these people had their voice mails hacked.
3) In addition to celebrities and public figures, the files included names of victims and families of victims of a terrorist bombing, of child abductions, rape, murder, and families of Iraq and Afghanistan war dead. Scotland Yard has notified some that the investigator in question actually did hack their voice mails.
4) In the case of one child abduction, the investigator allegedly erased voice mail messages in order to create room on the voice mail for more messages to which he might listen. This confused family and police who thought it was the victim erasing the messages and, therefore, she might still be alive and absent voluntarily. It is alleged this confusion may have been a contributing factor to the police’s inability to find the body for weeks as well as losing track of the perpetrator during the critical period immediately following the girl’s death. It was years later, therefore, before the perpetrator was finally brought to justice.
5) In the case of the family of one victim of the 7/7 terrorist bombings on the London transport system, the investigator allegedly listened in to dozens of anguished calls between family members. The private investigator who was the perpetrator of the phone hacks had a family member’s supposedly secure “X” number issued by the police to protect the confidentiality of communications between the police and the family member.
6) In the case of a rape victim promised anonymity if her case was not prosecuted, the investigator, the journalist and News of the World ran stories repeatedly identifying information and elements of her investigatory statement - details supposedly known only to the police.
7) Andy Coulson personally authorized payments to police in exchange for information, a crime and in direct contradiction to his testimony under oath in a trial that led to the criminal conviction of a former Labour MP. Police set up at least one journalist as a “police informant,” giving this journalist access to confidential information. Scotland Yard, suspicious of these activities, began an investigation as early as 2003. The head of that investigation was “counseled” to back off – which the Yard investigator did. This was reportedly one of two times (in 2000 and 2003) such “counseling” of a Yard investigator occurred after which the official “counseled” backed off.
8) The head of Scotland Yard’s initial investigation of the phone hacking reports went to work for News International after retiring. This investigation concluded that the practice was confined to one investigator and one journalist, that no further inquiry was needed although these investigators already had the 11,000 pages of contact information of 4,000 individuals.
Channel 4 has additionally reported that other News of the World private investigators hacked and used the paper to discredit a detective and his wife who were investigating the murder of a private investigator. This crime has never resulted in a conviction.
A Labour MP further alleges he has information in his possession that shows that News of the World also hacked private computers.
Moreover, Channel 4 has reported that an unidentified News of the World executive sought to delete information stored in News of the World archives in India this week. The Indian company refused to comply.
The scope of the scandal is obviously breathtaking, but why is it a US story?
News International is owned and managed by Rupert Murdoch and his son, James. In the UK they own The Sun, The Times (of London), and a 39% percentage of BSkyB. They are seeking to control 100% of BSkyB, the particular target being BSkyB’s vaunted news service. In the US they own The New York Post, The Wall Street Journal and famously Fox News. I am not one who views Rupert Murdoch as the anti- Christ. The latter, after all, is a religious figure.
However, Murdoch is the fellow who famously told the British public that Cameron’s austerity programmes would be good for them because they would “unleash the animal” of business. He is also well known for his influence and interest in power. Murdoch lives in the US, where his influence is felt daily on Fox News. This fact alone has been instrumental in calls in the UK to stop his acquisition of BSkyB.
But this is not about guilt by association or even one man, however much like the Emperor in “Star Wars” he may allegedly be. Ask yourself, how did The New York Post learn of the prosecutions’ internal concerns about the credibility of the accuser in the Strauss Kahn (DSK) rape case? If true, how did The Post learn about her alleged record as a hooker? Is a prosecution attorney going to risk his or her bar accreditation card to violate professional ethics and reveal this to a journalist? How did The Post get the information?
This question, how did the press obtain its information, has become the focal point of calls in the UK for greater regulation of the Press.
Regulation of the Press is a sensitive issue in the UK, but not as sensitive as in the US where the First Amendment of the Constitution prohibits abridgment of the freedom of the press. But it is precisely this question that must now be asked and answered. Not only in the UK, but in the US. The so-called phone hacking scandal has exposed the soft underbelly of vulnerability of the media and the public who trust and rely upon its objectivity.
How much of America’s daily diet of “news” is obtained illegally?
It may be uncomfortable for the US to face this question. There would certainly be resistance. But how much of America’s daily diet of “news” is obtained through illegal means and at the expense of other cherished freedoms, including privacy? How many Americans genuflected at Fox’s Hannity and Colmes or now genuflect at its conservative-only-voice successor? Consider public reaction if, instead of News of the World, the media source was Al Jazeera.
It is also critical for the public that an independent and credible body “clear the air” concerning press practices in the US in general, and at Fox News and The NY Post in particular. Someone needs to investigate thoroughly whether News International’s practice in the UK infects its practices in the US, whether these sorts of practices are widespread, and, if so, how they can be addressed to insure the integrity of the Fourth Estate – the institution upon which we all rely to keep our politicians honest.
Here in the UK, the government has embarked upon such an investigation. Now isn’t it time for the US government to start to ask questions too.